Tag Archives: 22nd amendment

A couple of years ago I did a series on laws the GOP should pass and in that I did a series of compromises I suggested we conservatives should suggest some laws that give liberals what they say they want but in such a way that we also get something in return and even though we’re giving them what they want we’re doing it in a way that does not violate our values (for instance make marriage a religious issue that government has nothing to do with, government only offers civil unions—they get the equality under law they want, we get the religious nature of marriage untouched by government).

And in this vein I have come up with the ultimate compromise, one that will in the end mean the decimation of Democratic and progressive power, but one that will be just too good an offer for the stupid liberals to turn down.

Lately there has been a call among the libs, idiots that they are, to overturn the 22nd Amendment…now to save you the time (because I’ll be honest after 19 they all get a little mixed up for me too) the 22nd is the one that limits any person from serving more than 2 terms (technically 10 years total) in the office of the president. Why? Because the liberals are so enamored of their divine savior that they think that His Holiness the transcendent Obama should just be allowed to serve 3 or 4 or 10 terms. He is just that good. (Yeah because that doesn’t sound like a dictator at all.)

And I say we give it to them. Pass an amendment that overturns the 22nd Amendment.

What! Do I want this nation to be destroyed? Do I want us to have a GDP lower than a hunter-gatherer tribe lost in the Gobi? Am I looking to spark a 2nd Dark Ages?

No. Hear me out.

For this, in the same Amendment (because this has to be an all or nothing thing) we overturn the 26th (the idiotic one that says unspeakably stupid and immature 18 year olds can vote). And not only do we overturn it we replace it with the new bar that no one younger than 30 can vote* for a federal office (House, Senate, Electoral College)** AND that all states must verify their electoral votes by making voters show valid ID.

Okay so? Why would that make allowing Obama have a chance at a third term acceptable?

Because it will mean the end of the liberal movement. It should come as no shock that the young, the immature, and the stupid from lack of experience tend to be liberal. Also people who have not built up any property (again mostly the young) tend to liberal—yes I know it’s a shocker that the correct (read, conservative) governments, for whom one of the central functions is protection of property rights, isn’t popular with the people who haven’t been alive long enough to earn much. Also strangely the age group that finds the Daily Show to be their primary source of information tends to be the most liberal.

Okay, so we know that young people are dumb, big deal. So what?

Well the benefits of Voter ID alone are almost too good to pass up. We all know that liberals have stolen an obscene number of elections through illegal voting.

I’ll tell you so what. If voters under 30 had been barred from voting Romney would have won by nearly 70 Electoral College votes. Obama would have only won California by about 9 points (I could pull up the charts with all the math, but I don’t want to make your eyes bleed)…that’s right California would be at just the edge of swing state territory. Swing states would become solid red and states that haven’t seen a Republican in ages would suddenly be battleground territory. (And that’s before you take out all the illegals voting through Voter ID…if you had those 2 things it’s conceivable that California could once again be the state that gave us Reagan).

Almost every single thing that makes a person more inclined to be fiscally conservative (experience, marriage, children, income, wealth, employment, spirituality) is tied to age. And think about it when the voting age was 21 in the colonial era, it wasn’t because people were so much more mature than by nature it was because the life expectancy was around 45. You were already living on your own by the age of 19, still two years before you could vote.

By doing this conservatives gain an easy majority in the Senate and likely a consistent veto-proof majority in the House.

Now social issues will probably continue to lean a little left, but that’s just the evolution of society.

Now you may say, okay that will work for now, but once those 20 somethings get older they’ll be liberal with a vengeance in their 30’s. Not so, because after a conservative Congress and conservative president institute real pro-growth policies, these otherwise idiotic young people will actually have something to work for and earn in their 20’s, will have families to care for, will have experience to guide them, and statistically they will vote for conservative economic policy.

Or you may say, the Democrats will never fall for it.

To which I have to say, you’re forgetting these are the idiots who fell for Obama’s shtick, deep thinkers they are not. If you offer them the chance to re-elect their God-king one more time they’d do things far worse than destroy their own party. They’re deluded to think that he’ll get re-elected every time no matter what. Yet the numbers show that’s not the case, but these idiots don’t understand numbers very much (as shown by their economic policies).

Now some of you still probably believe they’re not dumb enough to fall for this. That they’ll see through the ruse and just vote for Obama-lite in 2016 and 2020. Let me just point out that some of his idiot followers are attributing a cure for AIDS to the man, trust me they’re well beyond the point of being dumb enough. They really think this man is their lord and savior. They’re well beyond dumb enough. Well, well beyond.

They’ll fall for it. And they’ll destroy their party in doing so. So who’s with me on this?

*I’m more than willing to include an exception for active duty members of the military and veterans under 30.

**If states want to let the immature vote in state and local elections that’s their stupid choice.